This has always been a topic of controversy among bloggers. Unspun‘s view is that unless you are faced with a repressive regime you need to be responsible for what you write and you ought to own up for it.
Bloggers have no right to privacy says British court
Wednesday, June 17 07:30 pm
VNU Net Iain Thomson in San Francisco
* Print Story
The High Court in London has ruled that bloggers have no right to privacy under British law since blogging is essentially a public rather than a private activity. Skip related content
The case was brought by The Times newspaper after it discovered the identity of a blogger in the police service who wrote the popular NightJack web page, which was awarded the Orwell Prize for political writing in April.
The author, Richard Horton, a detective constable with Lancashire Constabulary, had sought an injunction to stop the paper from releasing his name but his application was denied.
It would seem to be quite legitimate for the public to be told who it was who was choosing to make, in some instances quite serious criticisms of police activities and, if it be the case, that frequent infringements of police discipline regulations were taking place, said Mr Justice Eady, The Times reports.
via Bloggers have no right to privacy says British court – Yahoo! News UK.
And the former Fairest Nation takes yet another step down the road to being a Big Brother, Socialist Nightmare.
The sooner Scotland secedes, the better.
Unless a blogger writes from a repressive situation, nobody would want to be anonymous about their blogs.
For starters, blogging is pleases the narcissistic needs; even the lamest kind blog writing focuses on the author. So you won’t find a serious blogger who is in denial of their existentialism. Or have you?
So back to the question about anonymity, I would have signed my name all over the internet, as would a lot of us. But that’s just not very safe if you’re a Public Defendant, or living in Saudi, or an Indonesian woman with complaints about healthcare.
Then again, the author’s identity becomes irrelevant if the issue discussed concerns the general public, no?